3 Dog Pat

Meanwhile, I thought the Euclid Corridor made perfect sense as a New Urbanist Paradise... but it was decided that our city's main thoroughfare-- Millionaire's Row-- was too far gone for any such thing, so we should be happy to get light manufacturing there... even though we'd just rebuilt the road to feature a block-by-block mass transit system that was clearly designed to service a New Urbanist Paradise. But here... in what has always been the worst part of town, interspersed with heavy industry and logistical infrastructure, soaked through with chemicals... here we should hold out for ideal high-density residential and retail. Amen. There's a little to much Sim-City idealism at work here. While we all debate the merits of this project, let's not forget this is supposed to prop up our new largest industry: healthcare. I'm all for rail and anti-car. But let's face it, if it keeps UC and the Clinic growing, we need to do this. What's most important is that the influx of cars is carefully managed and doesn't overstep the growth in residential and retail in the area also. I'm not sure I buy that this road will help UC or the Clinic grow any faster than they already are. I'm actually afraid it will stunt the growth and/or shift the growth into something much less desirable for an urban area. I know I keep beating a dead horse, but I'm really tired of the growth argument, because it insinuates that the area is stagnating right now. UC and the Clinic are already booming, I see no way that this road will accelerate that. The only benefit I think that may be had from this road is that we may get some new light industrial in a barren section of the east side between UC and downtown. [/quot Meanwhile, I thought the Euclid Corridor made perfect sense as a New Urbanist Paradise... but it was decided that our city's main thoroughfare-- Millionaire's Row-- was too far gone for any such thing, so we should be happy to get light manufacturing there... even though we'd just rebuilt the road to feature a block-by-block mass transit system that was clearly designed to service a New Urbanist Paradise. But here... in what has always been the worst part of town, interspersed with heavy industry and logistical infrastructure, soaked through with chemicals... here we should hold out for ideal high-density residential and retail. Amen. There's a little to much Sim-City idealism at work here. While we all debate the merits of this project, let's not forget this is supposed to prop up our new largest industry: healthcare. I'm all for rail and anti-car. But let's face it, if it keeps UC and the Clinic growing, we need to do this. What's most important is that the influx of cars is carefully managed and doesn't overstep the growth in residential and retail in the area also. I'm not sure I buy that this road will help UC or the Clinic grow any faster than they already are. I'm actually afraid it will stunt the growth and/or shift the growth into something much less desirable for an urban area. I know I keep beating a dead horse, but I'm really tired of the growth argument, because it insinuates that the area is stagnating right now. UC and the Clinic are already booming, I see no way that this road will accelerate that. The only benefit I think that may be had from this road is that we may get some new light industrial in a barren section of the east side between UC and downtown. Its not about growing UC, it is about growing a sparsely used huge area of land next to UC. I very passionately believe that this road will bring manufacturing into the industrial area. I also expect some housing to infill just because it will be an easy commute into the Clinic (by car or bike) When the funding is in place, I will probably sound more like an opponent than a proponent. The plan has gone a very long way from an extension of 490 to a true boulevard, but that is not to say it can't go farther. The clinic is obviously a major stakeholder in this road. By pushing them to push the state to make the road as Complete and Green as possible, with substantial "connectivity" to existing or new RTA rapid transit, the area could blossom as a viable neighborhood.

We have to keep pressure on the stakeholders to make sure the road is a "Complete and Green street" with strong linkages to rail. KJP, If they don't follow your plan to move the rail, are there spots close to the new road that would make better stations than what is currently there? Both Red and Blue lines?

In Euclid, the rail line separates the industrial from the residential. Also in Euclid, many of the largest employers, like Lincoln Electric are along the line. I know Lincoln is trying to show an environmentally friendly face (see large windmill). I am pretty sure they would jump on the opportunity to purchase naming rights for a station, maybe the whole line. Lincoln's corporate color is red.

@AJ I dont't disagree, and I fully support pressuring the stakeholders to make it the best possible plan. For me that includes strengthening connections to the rapid transit lines that cross the area.

@MTS- Can you give me a few examples, other than greenfield sprawl sites, where all all of the development around an infrastructure project (road, bridge, train, airport or otherwise) was pre-planned? The plan is rather simple from the stakeholders, and similar to KJPs maps. Bring back industry to the industrial areas and bring back housing to the residential areas. As for the promise of manufacturing based on STEM principles, I agree with the head of the Brookings Institution http://www.npr.org/2013/07/25/204862376/a-metro-revolution-cities-and-suburbs-do-what-d-c-cant?ft=1&f=1008

Shouldn't UC and the Clinic's growth and prosperity help its neighboring community, one of the highest concentrations of poverty in the country? Manufactuing is still the best job for low skilled workers to make a living wage. We have a good shot at medical device manufacturing, and high tech materials fabrication. That would put the industrial land back to productive use for the tax base of the city. That improves schools, roads, and all city services. But, they will not come if proper road transportation is not there.

There is no rail in Euclid, there is rail in Lakewood.

1 Key words "to bring". Not, we have a contract(s) with x company(s) to build x thing(s) to x location. Ie., Not "here are concrete plans from x investors for this area, which warrant a new road"! The issue with that argument is that it basically stops any public project. BINGO. Why this shouldn't be public. If private enterprise thinks this is so great, let them fund it and improve the neighborhood! THEY DO FUND IT, it's called taxation. That is how cities operate. It's residents have jobs inside of these facilities. The individual employees are taxed, and the company is taxed. Those taxes pay for roads, fire departments, parks, etc.

My support of this road goes hand in hand with my work to bring industry and manufacturing to the city.

@MTS I said if I worked there and lived " along the red line" I would. I have walked along many 4-6 lane roads. The ones that have neutral grounds are easier to cross than ones without. But, you bring up what I suspect is a quiet, but powerful driver for the opposition. The idea that if it doesn't benefit me or my friends, it's a waste of money. The people trapped in that neighborhood, who can't sell their houses, have little employment opportunities, do not easy access to one of the largest employment centers in the state? Well, let them eat cake, I don't like seeing too many cars when I go to new restaurant or gallery openings in UC.

^If I worked there and lived near the red line, sure. That is why I want it built As I understand it, from looking at the ODOT maps, it looks like a few of the side streets gets rebuilt, and of course the intersections will be new roads. Which side streets need to be rebuilt?

The road in Cleveland has 12 intersections maybe more, 8 lights, a grassy "landscaped" median (which is good for pedestrian crossing), sidewalks and a bike path.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/07/ohio_turnpike_money_would_pay.html#incart_river_default Ohio Turnpike money would pay for most of the $334 million Opportunity Corridor By Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Money from the Ohio Turnpike would cover most of the $334 million cost of Opportunity Corridor, under a draft funding list released Thursday by advisers to the Ohio Department of Transportation.

As someone who grew up in Euclid, and who still has most of his family in Euclid I can testify that RTA is well used there, despite it not being one of the more hip communities in Cleveland. At one point the 39 was very, very popular (^sorry ClevelandOhio, I know you didn't mean any offense. It's just a chip on my shoulder from everyone on the West Side along the Lake or the East Side Hts who think if you are not in one of those communities, you don't really matter)

http://www.ideastream.org/soi/entry/54254 That is the link to the sound of ideas discussion where Anthony Brancatelli speaks to why he initially opposed the OC when it was a highway, but with the design now he is for it. He also points out that manufacturing has grew in his ward, and he is very confident it will grow with this road. Steven Litt was also on the program, he is also fully behind it.

How about a park and ride near the new road, that comes with a refurbished red or blue/green station

If the $350MM isn't spent on a new road within the city if Cleveland, it will be spent on roads somewhere else in the state.

Many of those people do not have cars, KJP has the stats. With this road there will be a safer, more direct route to walk or bike to U.C. one of the largest employment centers in the state, If industry comes in, along with the tax revenue it will bring to the city, it will also be an opportunity for residents to get jobs there. If housing springs up, people's property value will increase. Ultimately, for me, this is about putting that vacant industrial land back to productive use. That benefits the entire city of Cleveland and all of its residents. And the flip side is this: What has not building the road done for the community? Is it thriving now?

These are the aerials of the path, taken from the ODOT website. http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/OpportunityCorridor/Documents/2012%20Project%20Area%20Aerials.pdf ^If you don't like his pictures, why not supply your own to counterbalance. If not on foot, you can use streetview.

We may be arguing, and agreeing. I fully support holding the stakeholders feet to the fire to make sure this development is everything its promised, and all it can be. I not convinced that people who oppose this project are truly informed about what is being proposed. My hope is that the energy/reputation they are expending to block this project could be channeled into making a complete, green, mass transit, industrial, and pedestrian friendly thoroughfare.

This area never had a "main road" The OC will provide it Roads are more than a conduit for personal transportation. Raw goods and finished products also travel main roads and freeways. I would wager the foreclosure crisis, and blight reduction strategies will claim/ have claimed 5 times as many houses in the area than construction of this road. If opponents of this road are successful, the money will not go to mass transit. It will likely go to another project downstate that is most likely an extension of sprawl. What is so bad about the Clinic? If we didn't have our Medical center, how bad would the city be right now. If they wanted a freeway, I would be against it. But university circle and the city need to grow, and the new BOULEVARD is one way it can. There isn't any reason the RTA could work with stakeholders to make areas around existing stations, near the new BOULEVARD, a TOD, like Eco Village on W. 65th. If you are a new nurse, doctor or adminstrator at the Clinic or UH, wouldn't a new house near work, rapid transit, and dedicated bike paths be appealing? Also, I grew up on the Euclid/Colinwood border. I know how bad it is in pockets of the "lower" east side. It never fails when something is going in in my neighborhoods, people from the Heights/Lakewood always find a way to call it a waste of money (see the Waterloo thread). If this benefitted people in the Hts, or along the lake on the West side, there would be less arguments about it. Of course there are always pros and cons to any public expenditure. The pros of this project outweigh the cons.

It's less of a highway than Lakeshore Blvd, or Clifton.

^^Man, I wish we had a like button. Great news, and bully for you for putting this together

I would fully support as much "connectivity" between the new road and the existing red line stops, and perhaps new stops.

AJ - When I see that map, I see all of the brownfields, abandoned industrial areas around the railroad tracks. KJP and I disagree about this, but when Reagan deregulated trucking, manufactures saw highway access along main feeder roads as the most desirable spaces. Nearly exclusively, that was greenfields with planned industrial parks. There is a really good "opportunity" for the city to reopen these areas to industry, whether it is medical device, Utica Shale related equipment, or even automotive supplier companies. By being next to rail, and a main street with a quick connection to I-77, I-71 and I-90, it could be a site selection committee's dream. Also, manufacturing is still the best ticket to get under-educated people a decent wage. Another argument for this, if Cleveland isn't selected the money will go to some sprawl project elsewhere in the state. For decades Cleveland area taxes helped fund those greenfield projects I spoke about earlier. This time, some of that money is coming back inside the city limits, to benefit the city. I think I've change my mind about this project a couple dozen times now, but I'm guessing we could rebuild 55th all the way to Chester with an extra lane (or two) and then resurface Quincy, Cedar, and Chester between 55th and 105th and still come in well under $350M. Bingo, why couldn't the city, county and neighborhood get a real boost. Wouldn't a ECP type investment be more worthwhile for the above streets instead of building a highway? @MTS. It is not a highway. If you think it is a freeway please cite other 3.5 mile roads that has more than a dozen intersection, 9 traffic signals, a grassy median, is tree lined, has sidewalks, crosswalks and bikepaths, that you refer to as highways.